1970 — Page 223

241

||

Page 223 of 241

424

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

in Hong Kong because we cannot otherwise get land for recreational purposes or for youth activities, land being so costly. The organiza- tions which devote themselves to youth work have no source of financial support in any substantial degree unless it is from the Government. Government must show that it has got the will to serve the people effectively and to meet the challenge of the day. There is the need to pay much more attention to youth welfare, much more than mere lip service. So far Government's action in youth work has been little more than minimal. I would like to say, first, that the Council should be given the staff to do all that we want to do; then, that the projects put forwarded by the Council do not meet with hidden obstacles in the Colonial Secretariat as we have experienced when Committees of which we were not entirely aware at the time these projects were pro- posed, were brought into the picture so that our projects seemed to have been stalled in consequence.

Sir, it is proper that today we should also recall that this proposal is not by any means the only one which the Select Committee has put forward. There is the project which has been approved, the multi- purpose sports hall, the prototype of which is supposed to be built in the Kai Tak East playground. Now work on the Kai Tak East play- ground is depending upon the ability of the Government to clear the land and I am told by the Commissioner for Resettlement that he cannot set a time at present for complete clearance. Knowing this situation, the Select Committee has long told the Hong Kong Government that we must not wait for the Kai Tak East Playground Sports Hall to be ready before we start on building more such halls everywhere in Hong Kong. We have asked your department, Sir, to produce a list of all those parks where such halls could be conveniently located for the benefit of the people, and if there is delay in Kai Tak East the Government should, if it wanted to show its goodwill towards the people, have long ago started on the construction of these halls in other areas in Hong Kong. Why should the children and the young people in other districts suffer just because the Government cannot go ahead with the original project in Kai Tak East? That has top priority. Secondly, we have conducted very extensive studies in depth about another proposal for multi-storey sports centres and we believe that soon enough a definite proposal will be submitted to the Govern- ment. This is a most expensive project, but it is certainly worth while because Government has the means and should put the money and the land into the service of the people. Thirdly, these flatted recreational community centres Mr. CHEONG-LEEN has suggested today for multi- storey buildings, which will call for community participation. That again is an excellent proposal which should be studied and, if feasible, put up for early implementation. Now the call for community partici- pation has already been put into effect in the many swimming pool complexes where schemes have been devised in conjunction with the

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

425

City District Officers to bring the people into action as soon as the pools are ready. Here again, the Urban Council has met with tre- mendous bad luck in that most of these swimming pools complexes have been considerably delayed from season to season. There is no public swimming pool built by Hong Kong Government that has not been considerably delayed. So, in the interval, young people grow up and the community suffers from lack of such recreational facilities. Mr. Chairman, for all these reasons I declare my full support for the sentiments which Mr. CHEONG-LEEN has expressed today.

COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT : On a point of clarification, I would like to disassociate myself with the statement attributed to me by the last speaker in reference to Kai Tak. The question was put to me as a comment, I wouldn't give the answer. I did not commit myself to what was quoted.

MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman I put the question to the Commis- sioner for Resettlement in writing. I passed it on to him next door. I am not dreaming. He might have been distracted, he might have been dreaming, but that is not my business.

MR. D. J. R. BLAKER:—Mr. Chairman, like Mr. SALES, I support Mr. CHEONG-LEEN not only to the hilt but to the Hilton. (Laughter).

MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Can I ask for clarification, which Hilton? (Laughter).

CHAIRMAN:-Any other speakers?

MRS. C. J. SYMONS:-Mr. Chairman, in supporting the amended Motion which I do very gladly, I should like to thank Mr. CHEONG-LEEN for reminding me of what I said several months ago. I am quite sure it wasn't an original idea although I was very much concerned. I would like to say though that there is one thing that I mentioned in my first speech at the annual debate in 1969 which is, to my mind, relevant. Until Government evolves or tries to evolve a youth policy, all these attempts we are making, although worth-while, cannot really solve the problem. I am all in favour of providing facilities for young people. I would want us to do so in the spirit that it is our duty to do so. I think you will find in other big cities in the world some very good recreational facilities but there are, nevertheless, a good many instances of juvenile delinquency and crimes which regrettably we have experi- enced in the last few months. I don't think one will exclude the other, but I think this Council should move forward because it is our duty to look after our young not because we are afraid they are getting into bad ways. I think it would be quite wrong for us to proceed in that light and so I would like to thank Mr. CHEONG-LEEN for his very fine remarks and thank him also for reminding me that though this is February, it is almost like an annual debate. Very interesting.